I am inclined to take Nassim's position as true, since it agrees with my desired beliefs: that moderate drinking is quite harmless, or if there are harms, they are outweighed by the benefits.

Modern medicine often gives us access to amazing drugs which have, in small print, a long list of associated, known, proven harms to our organs and health. The logic, as I understand it, is that the benefits of the drugs outweigh the harms.

The logic is not "that these drugs are harmless and possess only benefits".

▲

zmgsabst 5 hours ago | parent [-]

This is important when discussing (eg) cancer treatments: a treatment may leave you alive for longer but in worse health — and therefore, it’s unclear which is preferable.

▲

rapidaneurism 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Arguably when left alive your health is by definition better than the alternative.

I suspect you mean the good health for a few months before death compared with a worse health during and after treatment. Still I had to make the quip.

	▲	nkrisc 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Everyone will die. The question is whether, say, two extra months spent in a miserable state is worth it.
	▲	burnt-resistor 3 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		QALY optimization doesn't necessarily optimize for quality of life like it claims on the tin, it optimizes for quantity of life. Would you like 1 year and unknown discomfort or 10 years and a colostomy bag? Near end-of-life interventions (in the US) tend to be unnecessary and leave patients worse off, and it's done because hospitals and doctors are greedy. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/surgery-near-end-...
	▲	zmgsabst 3 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		No — I meant worse health. You die in both scenarios, you live slightly longer (eg, 8 months versus 6 months) and during the overlap, you are less healthy than you would have been. Losing 6 months of seeing family, enjoying trips, etc due to side-effects from treatment just to live 2 months extra, but incredibly ill the whole 8 months. In my perspective: you experienced less total QALY by taking the treatment and had more time, in worse health. Even counting those 2 months at zero, the non-treatment option experiences more vitality, in total — because 2 sickly months at the end doesn’t offset 6 months of lost vitality immediately before.